I've heard people say that technology lessens the value of art. Applied to computer-generated art, the theory means that technology has stolen the role of an artist in society.

Well, that idea is nonesense. The computer is a tool of the same intent as a paintbrush and canvas. Older artists may justify their claims that students of art have it too easy to create art because a computer can do all the work for them. That could be true on the surface... but I wonder how many of those artists have the skills to make computer art. Everyone is wrong who thinks that you can press a button on a computer and make art; while there are nifty effect tools in many art programs that require only clicking your mouse, there are also many cool painting techniques like splashing paint on canvas and hailing it as art.

Your computer is nothing more than a sophisticated system of canvas and paints. The pros of your computer is that you never run out of paint and canvas. Your con is that it's not easy to accustom yourself to draw and paint while your hand is a couple feet from your focus.

The disdain for computer art is of the same vein as the disdain for digital photography among photographers. It's misappropriated fear of technology. The fear is of a phantom, as the desire from which we create art, and the skills required to produce it, will always remain. Besides, it takes a superbly talented person to create computer images that can pass as "traditional" pieces; high-level computer art is no simple click of a button.

These images are samples of art I rendered on a PC using Corel PhotoPaint 8 and 10 from 1998 to 2002.